War game - Inter-European Jihad

[wtfNeedSignUp]

It's pretty interesting to read the Uke/Russian war threads (when it isn't politi sperging) so I wonder how people would think the very likely eventual Muslim on Christian civil war in Western Europe would play out. Both in terms of events and in terms of global response - Which countries would support who.

Base assumptions, that might be incorrect in practice:
* The Muslim goal is to impose strict Sharia laws on western countries and make themselves the ruling class, western countries goal is to return to normalcy.
* The Muslim side will be lead by a combination of terrorist groups which means they will likely engage in their own petty struggles but will be overall united.
* None of the sides would make the optimal move due to corruption and incompetence, but they won't be comically idiotic either.
* Sides won't suddenly switch morality, Euros won't go full Hitler and Muslims won't look for solutions that make them look weak.
* Not all Muslims would go against their government, but a sizable part of them will and near 100% within Muslim enclaves.
* Muslims will have access to heavy firearms, basic rockets and explosives under the assumption that they already amass them and the western countries would never report on it directly.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

You might as well ask who is going to win jerusalem, the christians or the muslims. I kinda feel like we're missing an important group in the analysis.

--
But I'll play along.

For a civil war you would need two sides that are moralized; willing to fight. As one isn't, it's pretty obvious who would win.

Both christians and europeans completely lack the will to fight to win. I've talked to european muslims and though they aren't always the brightest (but some are) and are far from well organised (lots of muslim infighting), they all have a strong will to fight. Battles are won in the mind first. The problem that muslims face is that they don't have a good story to sell, and they're not very good at converting either.

If christians/europeans somehow got moralized and got over the atheist/christian divide as well, it isn't a question that they would win. Muslims everywhere have the problem that their groups aren't high trust, so they lack good communication and organisation for large scale events. Russian or chinese support wouldn't be sufficient there, and I don't see how it would be in US interest to let muslims run wild either. Our intelligence could probably cook up a psyop or two to mobilize europeans.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

You might as well ask who is going to win jerusalem, the christians or the muslims. I kinda feel like we're missing an important group in the analysis.

--
But I'll play along.

For a civil war you would need two sides that are moralized; willing to fight. As one isn't, it's pretty obvious who would win.

Both christians and europeans completely lack the will to fight to win. I've talked to european muslims and though they aren't always the brightest (but some are) and are far from well organised (lots of muslim infighting), they all have a strong will to fight. Battles are won in the mind first. The problem that muslims face is that they don't have a good story to sell, and they're not very good at converting either.

If christians/europeans somehow got moralized and got over the atheist/christian divide as well, it isn't a question that they would win. Muslims everywhere have the problem that their groups aren't high trust, so they lack good communication and organisation for large scale events. Russian or chinese support wouldn't be sufficient there, and I don't see how it would be in US interest to let muslims run wild either. Our intelligence could probably cook up a psyop or two to mobilize europeans.

The issue is that it's not going to be a traditional civil war it will be highly asymmetric with one group having standard western military grade weapons, and the second group will use way cheaper weapons in a guerilla style warfare using their large numbers. Technically it could be over by just razing the Muslim enclaves to the ground, but we all know Europeans won't even dare cut power to them.

 

[Trump's Chosen]

The issue is that it's not going to be a traditional civil war it will be highly asymmetric with one group having standard western military grade weapons, and the second group will use way cheaper weapons in a guerilla style warfare using their large numbers. Technically it could be over by just razing the Muslim enclaves to the ground, but we all know Europeans won't even dare cut power to them.

You're making it sound less like civilian vs. civilian and more like state vs. muslims. It would be hard to root out defectors inside the state at this point.

Muslims have no cause for starting a civil war, so they'd have to have a european counterpart to arab spring, a kind of glowie instigation, as muslims are currently mostly winning anyways without having to fight. Even if you look at one of european prime powers, Germany, on the one hand they have increasing votes for AFD, on the other hand, AFD is making deals for massive amounts of immigration. These are not choices that will improve stability/defensibility.

In the scenario you're painting, we know how the assymetric warfare pans out in the end. Though it isn't so different from any conflict, it depends a lot on how brutal each side is willing to be, and how well they manage to sell that to their support. Americans may be getting demoralized, but Europeans are on a whole other level of demoralization.

For example, you see the european reaction to Israel's actions, the complete unwillingness to be violent and achieve goals. Being aghast at it and unable to look at the situation with some stoic distance. So you're very accurate when you say europoors won't go full extirpation or containment, and that's why they couldn't achieve any win condition.

 

[im5!XxhO]

The idea of a endtime struggle between Muslims and Christians in Europe is a weird fantasy to me.
It would require both Muslims and Christians to act as a united political entity across Europe. For the Muslims that may just be possible albeit unlikely, for Christians it won't happen. It has never happened historically where Christians would ally with Muslim rulers against other Christian states and vice versa. European Christianity is nowadays increasingly insignificant and not more politically united.

If we assume against all odds that a civil war breaks out (does it include Russia by the way?), there's no way the US would remain neutral. Their elite has too many business interests in Europe to give it up. China would likely try to blame "Western imperialism" and use it to gain influence.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Muslims have no cause for starting a civil war, so they'd have to have a european counterpart to arab spring, a kind of glowie instigation, as muslims are currently mostly winning anyways without having to fight. Even if you look at one of european prime powers, Germany, on the one hand they have increasing votes for AFD, on the other hand, AFD is making deals for massive amounts of immigration. These are not choices that will improve stability/defensibility.

The idea of a endtime struggle between Muslims and Christians in Europe is a weird fantasy to me.
It would require both Muslims and Christians to act as a united political entity across Europe. For the Muslims that may just be possible albeit unlikely, for Christians it won't happen. It has never happened historically where Christians would ally with Muslim rulers against other Christian states and vice versa. European Christianity is nowadays increasingly insignificant and not more politically united.

The way I see it starting is similar to the BLM riots. One country has some police officer kill the wrong person and it would start an ever increasing cycle of riots with escalating violence until terrorism cells start using it to gain ground. With other countries also having their own fronts opening due to either standing with the original country or being seen as easy picking.

It will absolutely happen though since EU is already a powder keg due to mass immigration, massive crime and two tier justice system.

In the scenario you're painting, we know how the assymetric warfare pans out in the end. Though it isn't so different from any conflict, it depends a lot on how brutal each side is willing to be, and how well they manage to sell that to their support. Americans may be getting demoralized, but Europeans are on a whole other level of demoralization.

The way I personally see it ending is Muslim areas gaining "autonomy", meaning the Muslims can impose Sharia laws and gets free gibs from the country containing it. With daily cases of terrorism outside those zones being painted as the new normal "part and parcel".

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

The issue is that it's not going to be a traditional civil war it will be highly asymmetric with one group having standard western military grade weapons, and the second group will use way cheaper weapons in a guerilla style warfare using their large numbers. Technically it could be over by just razing the Muslim enclaves to the ground, but we all know Europeans won't even dare cut power to them.

They kind of did that in France last year. The French government let the Muzzies have their protests over their own halal-flavored St. Floyd (retarded car thief who wrecked his stolen car, fought some cops, and got shot dead) and then the minute it started to look bad i.e. right-wingers started to mobilize, the French government said "non, non" and turned off the internet and shoved all the Muzzies back into their banlieu whilst arresting the right-wingers. They were definitely tear-gassing Muzzies though, since how else do you calm down a pack of animals. There was only a few days, not weeks and weeks, of cities burning like there was in the US.

That's why a European jihad won't ever happen. European governments work hard against Muslim radicalization because they know that having weekly trucks of peace really redpills normies on the Muslim problem. Your average Euro-Muzzie is a halal-flavored welfare leach who just wants free shit from the government and the right to rape and murder and steal as they please. To them, Islam only comes up when they can say "oh it's my culture to beat my four wives and throw acid on teenage girls." Like I don't even think Sharia patrols are as common as they were. What you'd really get is unorganized violence or uprisings led in part by local white communists.

Now sure, maybe ISIS 2.0 comes by and starts inspiring the youth to want more than just leaching off the kuffar. Or maybe all the anti-radicalization programs stop and the trucks of peace start running again. But I don't think they'd win at all. They'd just have a Europe-wide version of The Troubles for a few years and the EU and their establishment probably start paying lip service to secularism and the dangers of Islam. At most they'd finally start some measures against mass immigration, but it would be too little, too late. Their economies would be fucked hard from tourists and citizens alike getting murdered, trucks of peace, suicide bombings, etc. They'd probably bring parties like AfD into the government and let "far-right" militias operate.

The way I personally see it ending is Muslim areas gaining "autonomy", meaning the Muslims can impose Sharia laws and gets free gibs from the country containing it. With daily cases of terrorism outside those zones being painted as the new normal "part and parcel".

I think this would happen too, but I think Islamist terrorism outside those zones would be as common as IRA terrorism in Northern Ireland after the Good Friday Agreement that is to say not very. They'd very likely still do petty crime of course as they already do. Said "far-right" militias would of course be demilitarized and their leaders arrested at disproportionate rates for what they did during the jihad.

 

[im5!XxhO]

The way I see it starting is similar to the BLM riots. One country has some police officer kill the wrong person and it would start an ever increasing cycle of riots with escalating violence until terrorism cells start using it to gain ground. With other countries also having their own fronts opening due to either standing with the original country or being seen as easy picking.

It will absolutely happen though since EU is already a powder keg due to mass immigration, massive crime and two tier justice system.

The BLM riots didn't come close to starting a Civil war. Europe also had massive riots for years and will have massive in the future. Terrorism and riots are not enough to trigger a continent wide civil war.
For a civil war to break out in countries like Germany, France, the United Kingdom or Spain, it would require those countries to have clear political lines along whose people would take up arms. It would also require there to be at least two sides that are willing to take up fight in an organised member and those sides have to be big enough to sustain the war.
"I don't like muslims/white people" is not a platform that is uniting significant amounts of those people with the capabilities to actually wage war.

I will bet against a Civil War breaking out in Europe between Christians and Muslims in my lifetime which if things go really well should be another 75 years, but I doubt the bookmaker are offering that one. As far as the EU goes it is an extremly mild powderkeg, Europe has seen historically far worse. Crime will increasing steadily is near historical lows, mass immigration is high by not affecting all of Europe equally and a two tier justice system might trigger a revolution but for the factors outlined above no civil war. If the current situation isn't even enough to put (so called) right wing parties which are mostly 1980s conservative in power why do you think it will motivate people to give up their lazy life and take up arms?

 

[Smashed & Slamed]

I do see a shooting war maybe happening in 50 years I think on a shorter timescale you will have violent segregation instead.
The mudhsits take over a neighborhood or street and slowly kick out the natives who are forced to move to a different location. Eventually some places will kick out the muslims before they will have the numbers and also the white flight will have nowhere else to go.
You will end up with no go zones across multiple places and organized crime thriving inside those no go zones which will attack each other with good old fashion gang violence.
But that is assuming that things keep going the way they have been so far.
Europe is broke. Almost all EU nations are 100% of GDP in debt, some have more debt and very few have less debt. Majority of EU economies are stagnating with some deflating. In spite of all the immigration the pop growth rate is not that high. More and more of the population is unfit and unwilling to work and there aren't enough workplaces for everyone. The pensioners live longer and grow in number each year in spite of attempts to increase work age.
That isn't sustainable. Anyone with a bit of sense can see it's not sustainable. Nobody knows how this will end up blowing up or when, just that it will. Once the money runs out you can have anything from revolutions to bread riots to military juntas.
The silver lining is that the mudshits are not a real threat. The people coming over are for the most part not mudslime warriors fighting the jihad. But welfare leachers from dogshit nations like Turkey, Algeria, Bosnia and so on. Once welfare dries up or the fire rises a bit too high they will all flee like cockroaches. A way this could go poorly is that their own shitholes will have a collapse at the same time so they won't be able to flee. But you will have other bigger problems to worry about.